Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

More marquee tourism mad money for Toronto? And they're going to spend it on an American speaker?!

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:57am - 48 Comments

Why, it’s an outrage! A scandal! A debacle! Just give ITQ a second to grab some nails and a fresh -gate from the supply cupboard, and — wait a second. Still reading.

Hmm.

Has ITQ gone completely crazy, or is this, in fact, exactly the kind of thing that the MTEP should be funding: An attention-grabbing, attendance-boosting headliner for a longstanding, historically successful event that needs just a little extra oomph to make sure the recession doesn’t take too heavy a toll on the bottom line? Heck, it even manages to be both family- and gay-friendly — and since it’s going to be announced more than 48 hours in advance, it may well rake in some of those all-important out-of-towner tourist dollars! What more could you ask for, really? Well, unless you’re one of those cranky Toronto-hating Republican-favouring C/conservatives, of course, in which case you’d probably rather pay for another sex parade than spend a single taxpayer dollar to bring Slick Willie to town, but really, it’s hard to see how anyone who supports the concept of the marquee tourism program could find fault with giving money to this particular event.

Tags: Bill Clinton, but what does rob anders think?, Lisa Raitt, more marquee-ier than a hot air balloon festival, tax credit where credit due

More by kadyomalley

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Leaving aside that I don't like Slick Willie, surely there is some incongruity in using tax $$$ to attract a man who has made tens of millions of $$$ since leaving office. If we are going to just hand out money to random people, could we at least give it to someone who does not already have $100 million in the bank.

http://intensedebate.com/people/BCerInToronto BCerInToronto

Joylon, do you have any suggestions of people that a) Don't have any money, and b) would be a tourist draw that people will pay to come speak?

If so, I'm sure the CNE will be happy to listen to your suggestions.

Kady, you're correct. This would seem to be exactly what the marquee events program is meant to do.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

It's really about how much of a crowd he can draw, not how much he costs. That was, after all, the whole idea behind the program, as far as tier one events, at least — the biggest bang for the buck. (Which is why it also made sense to fund Pride Toronto, and would have made sense to do the same with Montreal's Divers/cite.)

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Since when are Canadians interested in listening to a pol? I think CNE numbers are dubious because I don't believe 25,000 people are going to pay $20-50 to listen to Clinton. If it's just about numbers of people they can attract, surely there are plenty of celebrities who could bring more people than Clinton.

CAPS

jolyon I think you are completely incorrect. I believe there would be a lot of people would want to pay a few extra dollars to hear Slick Willie. I believe the tag-line heding for the event is Clinton for the Masses so that instead of an expensive event for a select few this is an opportunity for a larger number of people to give him a listen.

As Jon Stewart says, "The Big Dog is back."

And as Hillary says, "I'm the Secretary of State, not my husband." (Apparently it was the all due to faulty translation – and she shook hands with student when leaving.)

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Maybe in the US he's 'back' but I don't think Canadians give a monkey's what Clinton thinks. Unless CNE is expecting 24,000 Americans from Buffalo and Detroit to attend, I don't believe this event will be as big as advertised and all that will happen is that we give even more money to someone who already has earned $100 million over the past decade.

Anon

"Maybe in the US he's 'back' but I don't think Canadians give a monkey's what Clinton thinks"

Of course, you always know what Canadians think from the confines of your mother's basement.

Stephen

Is there a Q and A so I can ask him what speech his wife would have given?
http://phantomobserver.com PhantomObserver

Better question for you: which MP is most likely to denounce this sort of spending? Because I personally can't think of any MP — Liberal, NDP, Tory or otherwise — who's going to protest the presence of Slick Willie (and thereby risk the ire of the current U.S secretary of state).

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Oh, I doubt if any MPs will gripe about it, but that doesn't mean it may not spark some grumbling amongst the same small but feisty contingent of C/conservatives who have no problem pitchforking cash to the Calgary Stampede, but get all bent out of shape over funding for events less to their personal liking. There is also the unfortunate reality that Tony Clement used the whole "no more money for big cities in Quebec and Ontario" argument to explain his decision to reject Diverse/Cite's METP application, but as far as this event goes, they've got a pretty good defence against any criticism that should surface.

http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

To be fair to the Stampede-folk you speak of, I would imagine the percentage of the population who are happy to take funding, but gripe about funding going to events/things they disagree with is probably a whole lot higher than just the number of C(c)conservatives.
Dakota

Got your Calgary hate going full on today don't you Kady?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

(rolls eyes)

William

When Kady makes a mistake and insults the good people who attend the Calgary Stampede she was rightly corrected by a couple of commenters and she rightly apologized. She probably realized that if she would not insult the good Maritime people or the good Quebecois people with snarky remarks, then she shouldn`t be churlish with Albertans.
That should have been the end of it—–in this case, your comment was not needed.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I'm pretty sure that Kady doesn't have a "hate-on" for Calgary, as Dakota claims. Hence the eye-rolling. I'm one of the good people who attends the Calgary Stampede, and I didn't feel insulted in the slightest by Kady's light-hearted churlishness.

Mulletaur

I'm surprised they haven't stuck a pitchfork into the Calgary Stampede, given the fact that it has provided so many bad photo opportunities for PMSH.

Hanging Out

I hope he doesn't bring his buddy George W along this time.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

That would be good. They could do another wink and nudge with Frankie.

Stephen

I would rather they spend the money bribing Supertramp to reunite and relive their glory days at the EX….wow those were great shows…when the old stadium was the only place a big show could be held.

CAPS

Amen to that.

Mulletaur

Hah, throwbacks.

http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Kady, just out of curiousity how did you come up with "gay friendly" as a description of a Bill Clinton speaking engagement?

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I was being just a tiny bit mischievous there in alluding to the Pride fracas, but I can't see any reason why it wouldn't be gay-friendly. Can you? (It's worth noting that I tend to consider most events to be gay-friendly, in the sense that they're friendly to all willing to plunk down hard earned cash, unless there's a reason to think otherwise. And considering how much the Tories were highlighting family friendliness in the post-Ablonczy funding announcements, I thought it was worthy of noting that this seemingly manages to be both.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Friendly, in a don't ask/don't tell kinda way!

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Now, now. People — or at least their positions — change!
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Now, now. People — or at least their positions — change!

http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Fair enough. And I like the guy, but I've never fully lost the grudge regarding his handling of all things same-sex while in power. I'm glad he's being vocal about his change of heart, but I have to admit it feels a bit like Mike Harris coming out and admiting that maybe all welfare recipients aren't lazy, mooching SOBs, after all. Principles and values only matter if you hold to them when the rubber hits the road.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

Fair enough. And I like the guy, but I've never fully lost the grudge regarding his handling of all things same-sex while in power. I'm glad he's being vocal about his change of heart, but I have to admit it feels a bit like Mike Harris coming out and admitting that maybe all welfare recipients aren't lazy, mooching SOBs, after all. Principles and values only matter if you hold to them when the rubber hits the road.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

His Chicago acceptance speech in 1996 was gay-friendlyish:

“Old or young, healthy as a horse or a person with a disability that hasn't kept you down, man or woman, Native American, native born, immigrant, straight or gay — whatever; the test ought to be I believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. I believe in religious liberty. I believe in freedom of speech. I believe in working hard and playing by the rules. I'm showing up for work tomorrow. I'm building that bridge to the 21st century. That ought to be the test.”
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

And both Canadian and American societies have come a long way since then too – it's certainly not fair to judge past decisions on the basis of current mores.

I think his whole handling of gays in the military was the one that stuck in my craw, even allowing for the opposition he faced in enacting that small gesture. But I bet down the road historians will mark it as a seminal moment (no pun intended) in the progress toward eliminating homosexual discrimination.

I will also admit I have absolutely zero understanding of why people get so worked up over same sex unions, rights, etc. So I have a low tolerance for half measures in that regard.
http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

No pun intended indeed……LTIC

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

You're right, and I cheerfully retract my churlish anti-Stampeder slur.
Wascally_Wabbit

Maybe the Billy of the Hilly-Billy road show will bring along the Goracle – to explain Climate Change to these frisky C/c's…
Old School Liberal

Is anyone else out there thinking that "Bill Clinton" and "stimulus" are a dangerous combination?
Anon

Could be worse … the CNE could have invited Dubya or Dick!

Mulletaur

Dubya would have been a good draw and entertaining to boot, no matter what you think about him or his presidency. Cheney would have been lynched, or at least, arrested on an international warrant.

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Good grief – all the Con nick names. Bill Clinton draws crowds, like it or not. The CNE have been having financial troubles for years and Toronto sure needs the tourism. Alberta had George Bush, Jr., so what the hell.

http://intensedebate.com/people/DZulu Dave Z.

And yet Toronto couldn't resist to one-up us. They had both George W. Bush and Bill Clinton speak together there a few months after the former's Calgary appearance.

All joking aside, I agree that this is the kind of event that should be funded by the Marquee Program. I have a hard time believing that there wouldn't be a big demand for this event. I would personally fork over $50 to hear any of the former presidents speak. I may disagree with the policies of some of them, but I think that they each would provide an interesting perspective on the events that happened during their tenure in power.

Dakota

At least it's not funding for a Tamil Tiger or Hamas speaker.

Old School Liberal

Yes. That is what we were all worried about.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

i will happily make a friendly wager that he sells out the joint…

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"i will happily make a friendly wager that he sells out the joint…"

You're on. I will be astonished, and pleasantly surprised, if more than 5,000 people are willing to pay money to hear Clinton speak on the penultimate weekend of the summer.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

great! shall we make this a charitable endeavor or shall we keep the stakes to honour?

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

(Thumbing yet again through the British North America Act 1867 and the 1982 Constitution to ascertain the justification for federal tax dollars spent to haul in the "big catch" of an adulterous lying-under-oath impeached former president whose current hobby is offering unjustified credibility to an evil and insane communist dictatorship in order to free a couple of hostages, the better to draw tourists to one city's party…)

Mike

commerce!?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Clinton is a good choice for this kind of thing. He's been to Canada many times before, he's a good speaker, he draws crowds wherever he goes, and in his free time he rescues journalists imprisoned in totalitarian regimes.
Wayne

just don't and I mean DON'T ever ask Hillary what Bill thinks about anything!
scf

in his free time he rescues journalists imprisoned in totalitarian regimes

LOL Now there's a hobby! Where do I sign up?